Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40815487›Full record

ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2025

Patient preferences and perceived barriers to follow-up care in a pharmacy-based colorectal cancer screening program: a national survey.

Jessie Schwartz, Mary Wangen, Olufeyisayo O Odebunmi, Austin Waters, Renée Ferrari, Macary Marciniak, Alison T Brenner, Stephanie B Wheeler, Parth D Shah

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Jessie SchwartzHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, USA. jschwar2@fredhutch.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-5087-4353
Mary WangenCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Olufeyisayo O OdebunmiUNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Austin WatersUNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Renée FerrariCenter for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Macary MarciniakSchool of Pharmacy, UNC Eshelman, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Alison T BrennerUNC School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Stephanie B WheelerUNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
Parth D ShahHutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFecal immunochemical tests (FIT) are recommended for routine colorectal cancer (CRC) screening because they are cost-effective, non-invasive, and convenient. Pharmacy-based CRC screening using FIT kits could be effective to improve screening rates, particularly in medically underserved communities. However, data on follow-up procedures and barriers after positive FIT results in this context remain sparse.

methodsWe conducted a national survey of 1,045 US adults aged 45-75 to assess preferences for follow-up care in a pharmacy-based CRC screening program we call PharmFIT™ and identify perceived barriers to follow-up colonoscopy after positive FIT results. We evaluated patient preferences and barriers using descriptive statistics. We used multinomial logistic regressions to identify correlates of patient preferences for follow-up and multiple logistic regressions to identify correlates of perceived psychosocial and structural barriers to follow-up colonoscopy.

resultsParticipants showed a strong preference for digital communication for negative FIT results and reminders, but favored direct, interpersonal communication from healthcare providers for positive results and follow-up. Psychosocial barriers, such as fear of colonoscopy or cancer diagnosis, were more prevalent than structural barriers like cost and transportation. Older adults, those with a regular healthcare provider, and higher-income individuals were less likely to report barriers, while non-white and Medicaid patients showed lower preferences for automated notifications.

conclusionPharmFIT should use tailored, multimodal communication strategies to address patient preferences and include strategies, like patient navigation, to address potential barriers to follow-up colonoscopy. This study reinforces the potential of pharmacy-based CRC screening programs to increase screening access and opportunities, particularly in medically underserved communities.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerPatient PreferenceAgedColonoscopyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOccult BloodSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesColorectal cancer screeningImplementation sciencePharmacy

Identifiers

PMID40815487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.